Why is backlit generally rejected?

[Felix448]

I´d like to post another question as I´ve recently gone through some old shots that I enjoy but (obviously) can´t really put on here.

We had a morning at FRA in 2022 with lots of sahara dust in the air. Shortly after sunrise, the light was very diffuse and therefore contrast also pretty low.

Examples:

Note: I´m not asking for a pre-screening or anything, these are purely for demo. I´ve also just quickly rescaled them in Paint, so quality might be a bit "eh".







I have loads of these images as I really enjoyed the smooth lighting along with the rimlight detailing the edges of the fuselage.

I understand why high-contrast, backlit shots, that havent been produced with intent (e.g. silhouette) are rejected as they show no detail of the airframe and can´t be viewed under an artistic approach either. In the example cases though, all the details are still there. It would be possible to increase focus on the photographed aircraft by doing panning shots instead of "statics".

Why are shots like these not accepted on the plattform, whats the specific reason behind it?

Thanks in advance!


Best Regards, Felix

[fleckenmann]

Because it just doesn’t look good tbh

[dlowwa]

Indeed, for the same reason why images with poor centering or contrast are rejected: it's generally considered aesthetically unappealing.

Your three sample shots are good examples of this, as the light is quite ugly.

[henrys_aviation]

Indeed, for the same reason why images with poor centering or contrast are rejected: it's generally considered aesthetically unappealing.

Your three sample shots are good examples of this, as the light is quite ugly.

in your opinion the photo is ugly, others might not see it like that. Blatant disrespect for others opinions like this is rude. A simple "in my opinion' at the end of this statement wouldn't hurt.

[A330fan14101992]

Because it just doesn’t look good tbh

Indeed, for the same reason why images with poor centering or contrast are rejected: it's generally considered aesthetically unappealing.

Your three sample shots are good examples of this, as the light is quite ugly.

Now now, some people are proud of the final result of their photos. Just because it doesn't meet the standards for this place doesn't mean that the photos aren't good. I'm sure a lot of people here have had photos that they're happy with get rejected because it doesn't meet the standards. The gentleman who started the thread here says that he's happy with the photos that he has posted in here. Doesn't give us the right to crap all over them. Let's not act like we are the CEO of aviation photography. It's a hobby where we collaborate and share the passion. Let's all realise this before some of us here get massive egos.

[Michael Rodeback]

Indeed, for the same reason why images with poor centering or contrast are rejected: it's generally considered aesthetically unappealing.

Your three sample shots are good examples of this, as the light is quite ugly.

They look a lot better than a good chunk of the stuff accepted here. As far as framing, we've trained ourselves not to think creatively about aviation photography. The number of beautiful shots rejected because of this is extremely high. I would love to see this site move away from the near-religious "15 pixels between the edge of the plane and the edge of the picture and exactly centered in every way" rule. We sacrifice far too many phenomenal pictures to this blatant dogma. We're not nearly as nutty as Airliners.net (thank heaven), but we're not far behind. Screening to keep away pictures of obvious poor quality is good, but there's a fine line between that and completely destroying the creativity in an entire genre of photography; we crossed it almost ten years ago.

[dlowwa]

the CEO of aviation photography

nice. imma get that on a shirt, thx.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Backlit photos are accepted when it actually adds something to the image, like on nice artistic silhouette shots.
Now if the result would have been better with the light on your back, then there is no reasons to accept the backlit option.
on this yellow sky shots, if they weren’t backlit they would definitely look even better and that’s why they aren’t acceptable.
Now it doesn’t mean you can’t be proud about them and there many other ways than JP to share them.

hope it helps
Alex

[Felix448]

Now if the result would have been better with the light on your back, then there is no reasons to accept the backlit option.
on this yellow sky shots, if they weren’t backlit they would definitely look even better and that’s why they aren’t acceptable.
Now it doesn’t mean you can’t be proud about them and there many other ways than JP to share them.

hope it helps
Alex

Thanks, this does give me something to think about & work with. Sometimes it´s hard to get the best angle for the right light, but I guess thats part of the challenge and can evelate a good image to a better one.

As far as framing, we've trained ourselves not to think creatively about aviation photography. The number of beautiful shots rejected because of this is extremely high. I would love to see this site move away from the near-religious "15 pixels between the edge of the plane and the edge of the picture and exactly centered in every way" rule. We sacrifice far too many phenomenal pictures to this blatant dogma

...

Screening to keep away pictures of obvious poor quality is good, but there's a fine line between that and completely destroying the creativity in an entire genre of photography

I tend to agree as especially in the start I´ve looked more for details or other interesting shots. After spotting for a longer time, I´ve noticed that I will usually put everything into making an image that will work under the guidelines.

On the other hand I´d also say that Screening and other recommendations have helped to improve my images & editing somewhat. They´ve just tended to become more streamlined to whats asked for, which sometimes does cause some creative boredom.

Best Regards

[seahawk]

Not every image has to go on jetphotos, always remember this.

[jakerepp]

in your opinion the photo is ugly, others might not see it like that. Blatant disrespect for others opinions like this is rude. A simple "in my opinion' at the end of this statement wouldn't hurt.

Dana didn't say the photos are ugly, but that the light is ugly. Personal preference, but that isn't being dismissive of a person but rather the weather and conditions.

[CARBONOX CN]

Bro, you don't spot planes only because you want to have photos accepted here, what really matters is that you enjoy spotting. If you think they are good pics, then keep it, share them with your friend and say "Yeh, I love the light". Backlit photos just don't work out in JetPhotos. Why are there so many old photos in JP that are backlit? Simply because quality of photos improve over time, it's that simple.

Have fun spotting.